Salvation Army v. Allegheny County

367 Pa. 373
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMay 21, 1951
DocketAppeals, 7 to 12
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 367 Pa. 373 (Salvation Army v. Allegheny County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Salvation Army v. Allegheny County, 367 Pa. 373 (Pa. 1951).

Opinion

Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Drew,

The Incorporated Trustees of the Salvation Army in Pennsylvania, plaintiff, brought this bill in equity to have certain real estate owned by it adjudged tax exempt as a, charity and to enjoin defendants, the *375 County of Allegheny, the City of Pittsburgh, and the School District of the City of Pittsburgh, from levying and collecting taxes on that property. The learned court below granted the relief prayed for and these appeals followed. . ■

' Plaintiff is a non-profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of this Commonwealth and admittedly is an institution of benevolence and charity. The property, which is the subject-matter of this action, is owned by plaintiff and is located at the corner of the Boulevard of the Allies and Cherry Way in the City of Pittsburgh. Upon this property is erected a steel and brick building, in part eight and in part nine stories high. The basement of this building contains a swimming pool, a gymnasium, locker room, boiler room and storage spaces. The first three floors have been set aside for the Pittsburgh offices of the Salvation Army and for the auditoriums, classrooms, workshops and other such rooms needed for the work of that organization. On the fourth to the eighth floors the Salvation Army maintains its “Evangeline Residence”, consisting of 229 sleeping rooms, a dining room which is operated exclusively for the residents of the building and the officers of the Salvation Army, a lounge and other rooms. A laundry is maintained on the ninth floor for the convenience of the occupants of the Residence, and the remaining space on that floor is devoted to the modest living quarters of a Salvation Army officer. On the theory that the “Evangeline Residence” constitutes a commercial use of that part of the building occupied by it, the Board of Property Assessment, Appeals and Review assessed the entire property at fifty per centum, of its value, and defendants levied taxes on the property at that assessed value. The learned court below enjoined the collection of these taxes on the ground- that the Residence was a charity and, therefore, tax exempt under Section 204 of the General *376 County Assessment Law, the Act of May 22, 1933, P. L. 853, as amended by the Act of May 3, 1943, P. L: 158 1 . -

The sole question raised is whether the Residence is a purely public charity and thereby that portion of plaintiff’s building occupied by it exempted, as is the remainder of the property, from taxation under the Act of 1933, as amended. The test for resolving that issue is laid down in Y.M.C.A. of Germantown v. Phila., 323 Pa. 401, 409, 187 A. 204, where we said: “In all our decisions on this subject there can be discerned as a prerequisite to the taxation exemption of an institution claiming to be benevolent or charitable that it, or the portion of its property, in respect to which exemption is claimed, must possess an eleemosynary characteristic not possessed by institutions or property devoted to private gain or profit. What is 'given’ must be more nearly gratuitous than for a price which impresses one as being proportionate to the services rendered. There must be facts which justify a finding that the 'actual use and occupation’ of the *377 premises is primarily- for the designated charitable object and not largely for commercial purposes.”

The chancellor made numerous findings of fact, all of which were affirmed by the court en banc, as to, inter alia, the physical appearance of the Residence, the requirements for admission, the sums paid for food and lodging by the residents and the care and indulgence shown them by the members of the Salvation Army. It is only necessary' to summarize these very detailed findings, according to them, of course, the conclusive effect they have upon us on appeal: Halkias v. Liberty Laundry Co., 361 Pa. 475, 478, 64 A. 2d 800; Norris Tl. & Mach. Co. v. Rosenlund, 355 Pa. 560, 50 A. 2d 273.

The public contributed all of the funds required to purchase the land and erect the building, of which the Residence was found to be a component part. This building was erected for the purpose of providing a structure in downtown Pittsburgh in which the Salvation Army could carry on its benevolent and charitable activities of protecting and elevating the moral, spiritual and physical well-being of the under-privileged and needy, and since- its completion the building has been used solely for that purpose.

The “Evangeline Residence” is conducted by the Salvation Army - in furtherance of its eleemosynary purposes — not for profit or on a commercial basis, but solely to prevent young, women of modest or no income and without homes in the City of Pittsburgh or from broken homes within the City from, falling victims to the vices which inevitably exist in all large centers of population and to which they might be susceptible. The rooms of the Residence are small but adequate. They are never rented for a night and transients are not accepted. To gain admission every applicant is interviewed by an officer of the Salvation Army and must meet four- qualifications-:- (1) ..the applicant must be a *378 young woman without a home within commuting distance of Pittsburgh or from a broken home within the city; (2) she must be less than thirty-five years of age and preferably less than twenty-five; (3) she must be in a low income bracket, if employed; and (4) she must be of a good moral character. The young women áre informed, upon admission, that they will be required to leave when they attain the age of thirty-five. Admission to the Residence is customarily denied to those who earn a gross salary of more than $40 per week and the average gross income of the girls, at the time of the hearing, was found to be $29.15 per week. The rent paid for a room is based on what each young woman can afford to pay, varying at present from $3.55 to $7.55 a week. The only other charge which the residents pay is $7.70 a week for two meals a day. The learned chancellor found that the Salvation Army received from the residents an average of $12.64 a week, of which $5.49 was allocated to a room and $7.15 to the fourteen meals, or approximately eighty cents a night for a room and fifty cents per meal. In many instances girls have been given free accommodations during periods of financial difficulties and no effort is made to require them to pay for such when they have regained their ability to pay.

A study of hotel and restaurant rates in the City of Pittsburgh revealed to the chancellor that, the average hotel guest pays as much per night for a room as the residents of the “Evangeline Residence” pay per week for a room and that these women are given their food at the Residence for approximately half of what they would be obliged to pay in one of the average city restaurants. Although there are no boarding or rooming houses in the vicinity of the Residence, the chancellor found that the prices charged in such places for rooms in- other parts of the city were substantially higher than those paid by, these, young women.

*379

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Pottstown School District v. Hill School
48 Pa. D. & C.4th 365 (Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, 2000)
Hospital Utilization Project v. Commonwealth
487 A.2d 1306 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1985)
Metropolitan Pittsburgh Nonprofit Housing Corp. v. Board of Property Assessment
368 A.2d 837 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1977)
Presbyterian Homes Tax Exemption Case
236 A.2d 776 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1968)
Shadyside Hospital Appeal
218 A.2d 355 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1966)
Bower Hill Civic League Appeal
215 A.2d 305 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1965)
Pittsburgh Bible Institute v. Board of Property Assessment
175 A.2d 82 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1961)
West Lawn Fire Co. No. 1 Appeal
26 Pa. D. & C.2d 267 (Berks County Court of Common Pleas, 1961)
Commonwealth v. City of Philadelphia
19 Pa. D. & C.2d 690 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1959)
West Indies Mission Appeal
128 A.2d 773 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1957)
Ymca of Pittsburgh Appeal
4 Pa. D. & C.2d 186 (Alleghany County Court of Common Pleas, 1954)
Goldman v. Friars Club, Inc.
158 Ohio St. (N.S.) 185 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1952)
Hill School Tax Exemption Case
87 A.2d 259 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
367 Pa. 373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salvation-army-v-allegheny-county-pa-1951.